Check this out, a new cert petition filed yesterday.
As the title of this post notes, this is one of ours. So we won’t be making substantial commentary on it.
But we can say that a sharply-divided Arkansas Supreme Court held that BAS’s Tyler takings claim for the State Lands Commissioner’s failure to return
If you were creating a moot court problem, what topic would you pick? You’d want a question that is a hot topic. Unresolved by the Supreme Court. Controversial, interesting, and complex.
Well, we have just the issue for you: our favorite topic, takings.
That appears to be what the powers-that-be behind Harvard Law School’s moot
Florida, like a lot of other jurisdictions, has an unclaimed property program whereby if an owner is deemed to have abandoned property (remember that old bank account you had in college years ago with a $2.50 balance?), the holder of that property may transfer it to the State, which keeps it until you come get
Get ready to join your colleagues and friends in San Diego for the 42d ALI-CLE Eminent Domain & Land Valuation Litigation Conference.
The 41st Conference was in New Orleans. Here’s a report of that event, and here are our reports from prior conferences in Austin and Scottsdale.
Here are some of the
Check this out, a recently-filed cert petition asking whether, in order to sue for compensation for a taking, the government must first affirmatively provide a cause of action (an issue recently left unanswered by the U.S. Supreme Court). That’s an issue we’ve been following closely (our outfit recently filed this cert petition also).
This
Because the latest takings cert petition is one of ours (our colleagues Dave Breemer and Deb La Fetra are counsel for the petitioner), we won’t be commenting all that much on it.
Except to say that this is the latest in a series of cases where the obligation to provide just compensation for takings butts
A short one (per curiam is one two-sentence paragraph), with an interesting concurring opinions from the Florida District Court of Appeals (4th District).
In Vazquez v. City of Hallandale Beach, No. 4D2023-0833 (June 12, 2024), the court held that a restrictive covenant that ran with Vazquez’ land (and others in his subdivision, including the
The Texas DOT had an easement over a portion of the Self property. The Selfs rebuilt a fence a few feet inboard of the easement (in other words, well into the part of the land not burdened by the easement). On the TxDOT side of the fence — but still outside the TxDOT easement area